- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
So Don Jr. Exchanged Messages with Wikileaks; Someone Explain to Me The Issue
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:28 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:28 am
Long-time listener here, first-time caller; I've long enjoyed the political debate on TD, but never felt a need to post until watching both continue to sling mud at each other an entire year after the election.
WSJ reports this morning that Donald Trump Jr. exchanged messages with someone representing Wikileaks in the months leading up to the election. We all know that Wikileaks is credited for releasing the trove of emails that are, according to many, to blame for Hillary's defeat. The problem is, the intelligence community has collectively said these were first stolen by Russia. The ethics of whether or not stolen emails should have been used in an election is moot to me, since Donald Trump was not the one who stole them, nor was he the one who released them. Wikileaks is a private, Swedish company.
I, for one, see the emails as nothing more than shedding light on practices that existed in the dark on the DNC/Hillary side. Why the media does not simply applaud the truth, or at least acknowledge that regardless of how these emails came to light, they did in fact exist, and their existence is undeniable.
Here is my question:
What's the issue with Don Jr. communicating with Wikileaks, especially after they contacted him for comments on potential releases? Is this supposed to be a smoking gun/nail in the coffin?
For the record, WSJ is a great newspaper, and brings a much-needed balance to print media that I am unable to find here while living in Europe. I'm just trying to get an opinion on how this 'revelation' plays into the entire saga.
P.S.; this is by far my favorite of the Hillary email:
WSJ reports this morning that Donald Trump Jr. exchanged messages with someone representing Wikileaks in the months leading up to the election. We all know that Wikileaks is credited for releasing the trove of emails that are, according to many, to blame for Hillary's defeat. The problem is, the intelligence community has collectively said these were first stolen by Russia. The ethics of whether or not stolen emails should have been used in an election is moot to me, since Donald Trump was not the one who stole them, nor was he the one who released them. Wikileaks is a private, Swedish company.
I, for one, see the emails as nothing more than shedding light on practices that existed in the dark on the DNC/Hillary side. Why the media does not simply applaud the truth, or at least acknowledge that regardless of how these emails came to light, they did in fact exist, and their existence is undeniable.
Here is my question:
What's the issue with Don Jr. communicating with Wikileaks, especially after they contacted him for comments on potential releases? Is this supposed to be a smoking gun/nail in the coffin?
For the record, WSJ is a great newspaper, and brings a much-needed balance to print media that I am unable to find here while living in Europe. I'm just trying to get an opinion on how this 'revelation' plays into the entire saga.
P.S.; this is by far my favorite of the Hillary email:
quote:
Other emails appeared to catch the younger Mr. Trump’s attention. On Oct. 3, 2016, WikiLeaks asked him to “comment on/push” a quote by Mrs. Clinton saying she wanted to “Just drone” Mr. Assange.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:32 am to Chisholm
Communicating with a leftist's hero like Assange?
That is bothersome.
That is bothersome.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:47 am to Chisholm
quote:WikiLeaks is an anti-western unofficial tool of the Kremlin and Russia's foreign intelligence services.
In a 2017 speech addressing CSIS, [CIA Director Mike]Pompeo referred to Wikileaks as "a non-state hostile intelligence service"
Their "whistleblowing" amounts to technically-enabled espionage against the U.S., NATO, and other U.S. allies, with only token efforts undertaken against other nations far more repressive than any in the West--notably Russia and China.
Drip. drip.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:53 am to Chisholm
If a Dem does it it’s called “opposition research”
If a Republican does it it’s “ colluding with Russia”
If a Republican does it it’s “ colluding with Russia”
Posted on 11/14/17 at 4:53 am to Navytiger74
So do you interpret Don Jr. communicating with Wikileaks as collusion with Russia?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:03 am to Chisholm
If it's the truth why is it an issue. Creating a false narrative like muh Russia is a crime.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:03 am to Navytiger74
quote:
WikiLeaks is an anti-western unofficial tool of the Kremlin and Russia's foreign intelligence services.
Their "whistleblowing" amounts to technically-enabled espionage against the U.S., NATO, and other U.S. allies, with only.
Drip. drip.
Governmental types like Navytiger here don’t like their pants pulled down for the world to see, therefor they despise wikileaks.
They are far too insular to realize however the rest of us don’t feel this way and actually appreciate our fraud of a government being exposed.
In their simple view of the world they think they are tarring Don jr. with guilt by association but the truth is the vast majority of us just don't care about it.
quote:
token efforts undertaken against other nations far more repressive than any in the West--notably Russia and China
China and Russia do not disingenuously claim to be free open societies with governments for, by, and of the people, a very important distinction, sorry if that escapes you.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:08 am to cave canem
Is the penalty for talking to a Swede death or life in prison?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:13 am to Chisholm
quote:
So do you interpret Don Jr. communicating with Wikileaks as collusion with Russia?
There is officially a degree of separation. We'll see how it goes. I've personally documented the evolution of the denialists from:
1. There was no meddling.
--Only Putin and Trump are still here. Putin's still here because LOL; Trump's officially still here because he's a dumbass.
2. There was meddling, but only from totally independent non-state freedom-fighters like WikiLeaks, not from Russia
3. Russia meddled, but had no preference and only sought to undermine faith in our institutions.
--A few Trumpkins are still here--like ShortyRob.
4. Ok, maybe Russia had a preference for Trump, but it was because Putin was justifiably angry at Hillary Clinton. And anyway no one from the campaign had any untoward contacts.
--This is where most Trumpkins remain stuck.
5. Clearly there were contacts between members of the Trump campaign and apparent agents of the Kremlin, but they were so low level. Nothing to worry about. Plus Hillary Clinton.
--This is where the rest of the Trumpkins are.
6. Okay, obviously there were some suspicious interactions between members of the Trump team and probable agents or allies of the Kremlin. We need to find out what happened, who was involved, what was their intent, who among the senior members of the campaign knew of this activity and when did they know it, has anyone broken any laws, and has anyone engaged in a conspiracy to conceal crimes or improprieties.
--This is where Mueller's team and the sane people in this country are.
7a. Okay, let's run these fricking abominations out of Washington and forget this regrettable episode.
--Some people are here, but I'm not yet. Honest Bob has much work to do.
ETA: 7b. Yeah whatever. Russia did us a favor. No big deal. It’s probably not really illegal. FEDGOV is so corrupt. We should have a good relationship with Russia anyway and what about Clinton and Soros? LOL. Melt snowflake. #MAGA
- Future Trumpkins If this trajectory holds.
Also
quote:
Army Fan
Member since Nov 2017
2 post
Welcome, comrade. Did you see any action in Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, or Dagestan?
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 10:55 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:17 am to Navytiger74
The closest I've ever gotten to Russia in uniform was The Ukraine. Great place.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:35 am to Chisholm
That's a long arse post just to ask a simple question. You will fit right in with this board of crazies.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:43 am to Navytiger74
8. It's not fair that we lost to Trump. Let's make up whatever we can to try to make ourselves feel better because it's not fair that we feel embarrassed.
- this is where Navytiger, and 99.99% of the democrats and Never Trumpers are on this 'Russia' story. The other 60% of the nation and the entire world has moved on.
- this is where Navytiger, and 99.99% of the democrats and Never Trumpers are on this 'Russia' story. The other 60% of the nation and the entire world has moved on.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:49 am to Xenophon
quote:60% of Americans would bribe Mueller to frame this bastard for the JFK assassination if it got the job done.
The other 60% of the nation and the entire world has moved on.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 5:59 am to Chisholm
quote:
Mrs. Clinton saying she wanted to “Just drone” Mr. Assange.
Did she really say this?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 6:00 am to Chisholm
If these emails were against the RNC then Julian Assange would’ve been pardoned by Obama and given the Presidential Medal of Freedom in short order
But since their team was exposed along with the MSM Wikileaks is nothing more than a tool of the Russians
But since their team was exposed along with the MSM Wikileaks is nothing more than a tool of the Russians
Posted on 11/14/17 at 6:13 am to Chisholm
Russia here...Russia there....Russia Russia everywhere.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 6:23 am to Navytiger74
quote:More likely, it is HIGHLY indicative of relative security protecting sensitive information in the various countries.
Their "whistleblowing" amounts to technically-enabled espionage against the U.S., NATO, and other U.S. allies, with only token efforts undertaken against other nations far more repressive than any in the West--notably Russia and China.
I'd bet heavily that Putin's Foreign Minister doesn't keep SAP materials on his kitchen pantry server. I doubt any campaign chairman in the world would be stupid enough to (A) Keep 10years of sensitive private correspondence stored on a g-mail account, and (B) Give up his password to a JrHigh-level phish.
Those levels of "protection" are beyond pathetic. You think other countries offer up sensitive information with such nonchalance?
So file this in a folder entitled "If We Had Similar Access to Comparable Russian, Chinese, NoKo, or Iranian Information, We Could Reverse the Equation."
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 6:24 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 6:23 am to Navytiger74
Yeah, I think I was in the Team6 sort of camp from the near the very start of the campaign in 2015, and didn't really move fully into the Team7 camp's view of things until the summer of 2016. If I may make a brief case why I believe Team6's position is implausible, I would highlight that the Trump team has taken many otherwise inexplicable reciprocating actions, and has engaged in several deceptive coverups now, that could only have come straight from the top. There was the Flynn-Artemenko affair and the Yates-McGahn conversation and the subsequent Nunes diversions and the lie told about why Flynn was fired; the anti-Ukraine lobbying effort; the coordinated tweets and messaging with WikiLeaks; the drafting of false stories in defense of DJTJ from Air Force One; etc. Plus, we now know that the Trump campaign was informed several times at least (from Page-Papadopoulos-Mifsud to DJTJ-Agalarov-Manafort-Veselnitskaya to Assange-Nix-Bannon-Farage) that the Russian government was reaching out to them and working hard in their favor. And beyond that, let's be honest, nobody who has been in the business of helping to launder Russian oligarch money for decades puts people like Manafort (working for free), Flynn, Bannon, Page, etc., on his campaign without assuming that they will be coordinating with Russian oligarchs. Finally, Manafort knew Russian agents were offering assistance in that Trump Tower meeting, and Trump himself had to have been informed about it, having been right there at the time.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News